Slashdot Mirror

I am fond of webOS(application base is tiny; but the interface is actually quite well thought out. The "cards" work quite well. Hell, maybe team Google will pick up their smoldering remains at the firesale and polish up the 'chromebooks' with some of the UI touches...)

Google's one step ahead of you :-D When Palm sold to HP, Google moved in and lured away the guy who designed the webOS user interface, Mathias Duarte. His current job title there is "Director, Android User Experience", so it's safe to assume that we'll see some of the same ideas that animated webOS making their way into the Android UI, if not their specific implementations.

more specifically the screenshot

http://allthingsd.com/20110418/apple-files-patent-suit-against-samsung-over-galaxy-line-of-phones-and-tablets/

Which one is the iPhone again?

I think you may need to provide some links to back the idea its about the icons as well. I'm looking at

http://allthingsd.com/20110418/apple-files-patent-suit-against-samsung-over-galaxy-line-of-phones-and-tablets/

more specifically the screenshot

http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/files/2011/04/apple-v.-samsung-2.png

* A sunflower for the 'photos' app

I don't even see a sunflower or flower of any type.

* A white cartoon bubble with a green background for SMS

The sms icon isn't green and doesn't have a cartoon bubble.

* A calendar icon with a red bar on top, and black text showing the current day

Its green, and that said it looks like a day planner calendar. Yes, this is similar but at some point you have to say "What else would look like a calendar and fit on an icon?" If the answer is only two or three things patenting one of them is absurd.

* An envelope icon against a cloudy sky

well, envelopes for email existed long before the iPhone. I don't see clouds or sky either in the email icons.

* A notebook with a brown binding on top

I'll give you this one... but again how many ways can you represent a 'note pad'.

So all in all we have one copied icon out of your list. I don't think your claim this is about the icons has merit given what I've been able to find. Obviously if you have some other links I'd be keen to see them and review my position.

I think you may need to provide some links to back the idea its about the icons as well. I'm looking at

http://allthingsd.com/20110418/apple-files-patent-suit-against-samsung-over-galaxy-line-of-phones-and-tablets/

more specifically the screenshot

http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/files/2011/04/apple-v.-samsung-2.png

* A sunflower for the 'photos' app

I don't even see a sunflower or flower of any type.

* A white cartoon bubble with a green background for SMS

The sms icon isn't green and doesn't have a cartoon bubble.

* A calendar icon with a red bar on top, and black text showing the current day

Its green, and that said it looks like a day planner calendar. Yes, this is similar but at some point you have to say "What else would look like a calendar and fit on an icon?" If the answer is only two or three things patenting one of them is absurd.

* An envelope icon against a cloudy sky

well, envelopes for email existed long before the iPhone. I don't see clouds or sky either in the email icons.

* A notebook with a brown binding on top

I'll give you this one... but again how many ways can you represent a 'note pad'.

So all in all we have one copied icon out of your list. I don't think your claim this is about the icons has merit given what I've been able to find. Obviously if you have some other links I'd be keen to see them and review my position.

"According to one source who has seen internal HP reports, Best Buy has taken delivery of 270,000 TouchPads and has so far managed to sell only 25,000, or less than 10 percent of the units in its inventory."

http://allthingsd.com/20110816/ouchpad-best-buy-sitting-on-a-pile-of-unsold-hp-tablets/

"Do-no-evil magic"? Citation bloody needed. Those days are past. Look at the Google+ names fuckery - stuff like blocking Hong Kong users from their email because they don't think their names sound American enough. Even their own employees!

You are not the customer, you are the product. Eric Schmidt stated it clearly last year. Make no mistake: Google has decided it's finally time to cash in.

This has abolished their goodwill in an instant. I'm seeing people seriously question Google for collaborative documents, for email, even for search. How much bad will do you have to be running up for people to think Bing might be a better idea?

The proportional response is suing. Samsung asked the ITC for an import injunction. That's what made their reaction the nuclear response.

The suit, filed on Friday in U.S. District Court in Northern California, alleges patent and trademark infringement, as well as unfair competition. Apple is seeking injunctions, actual damages and punitive damages, as well as a finding that the alleged infringement was willful.

The above is an exerpt from http://allthingsd.com/20110418/apple-files-patent-suit-against-samsung-over-galaxy-line-of-phones-and-tablets/

Apple filed for an injunction, damages and punitive damages first - as well as contending that the infringement was willful.... the only thing left out appears to be the kitchen sink.
What, in your opinion, is a proportional response to that?

Some of the ones still outstanding:

#5,966,702
#6,910,205
#7,426,720

Not saying they are valid just answering your question. There are a couple of more and I even think that Oracle was ordered to reduce the claims down to three distinct violations, of which, I am not sure if any of these were cited.

However, Google is in a sort of hot mess right now because all of the patents have to be proven invalid, a recent review of Google employee's email show that they were indeed worried about the legal ramifications of their implementation. With a going back and forth between Google employee's over should a license to Java be acquired before going forward. http://allthingsd.com/20110727/old-email-may-bite-google-in-java-patent-suit/

Please do say what they stole. As far as I can tell apple is complaining about some bogus design patents and some typical bullshit software patents.

Something like this, I believe:
http://allthingsd.com/20110715/itc-rules-htc-violated-two-apple-patents/?refcat=news

Unless you're being specific about who said it, your quote is worthless. People in the group you label "Apple zealots" will have a variety of different things to say.

The fact is that the App Store contributes about 1% to Apple's profit. Whether you think that is a lot or a little is purely subjective.

http://allthingsd.com/20100623/apples-total-gross-profit-from-the-app-store-since-launch-189-million/

Well MY Mozilla users cared when their plugins broke because with the FF 5 bullshit I got plenty of emails saying "I don't like this, is there something else I can use?" and I sent them straight to Comodo Dragon where plugins don't break on update. See that whole "its free" shit sandwich attitude is kinda a double edged sword since you are free to walk away and I believe you will be seeing quite a few do that. I personally was using Mozilla since the beginning but have now moved myself and my family over to Dragon (except for the oldest who has been and always will be on Opera, but he is just weird) because their bad attitude and plugin breaking were simply the last straw after the CPU and mem hogging of late. After all if it is free I really have nothing invested in staying either, right?

As for TFA reading the comments here I still don't think there are enough companies running 2011 software on 2005 hardware to justify the hoopla. Maybe it is different in Sunland but in the places I dealt with those that were sticking with older hardware stuck with the older OS that came with the hardware as well. Why would you want to slow down your 6 year old machine by trying to run the latest and greatest on it?

Besides Oracle is a DB company and I don't see many DB houses that need the speed of an Oracle DB and are willing to pay the crazy Oracle prices for it running old tech. There has just been too many advances since then (such as another poster pointed out built in hardware encryption and virtualization which isn't supported on these old chips) to be wasting cycles on old gear. in these places it is all about the IOPS from what I've been told and new gear frankly runs rings around even 5 year old chips.

Maybe I'm getting "too old for this shit" but frankly it still blows my mind how quickly we are advancing when it comes to chips. I remember paying frankly crazy money at the turn of this century for a whole 1Ghz CPU and now you have multicore monsters everywhere for peanuts compared to what I was paying just a decade ago. I know the price thing don't count in servers but the equivalent there is the totally insane amounts of data one can process now which would have required 5 times the time and an entire floor just a decade ago. Truly amazing stuff we have now and I just don't see very many Oracle houses caring about this, not when the new gear can crank out the IOPS and Oracle has the current record when it comes to DB throughput.

Because iPhone 5 rumors have probably dropped off sales of the iPhone 4, and they don't want the impatient to even consider Android and not wind up perpetuating the cultists.

Ohh, didn't read the news yet? Verizon iPhone Caused Android Market Share Drop and Roughly One in 10 Smartphones on T-Mobile USA Is an iPhone (~1 million)

Stupid arguments over how revenue is being booked are completely irrelevant. ...do we really think that we are so smart that we've noticed this and not one of the investors at IPO will?

You can ask AOL investors about how the way revenue is booked matters. They were recording revenues in a way the was eventually deemed fraudulent, several times in the company's history, in different ways each time, with warnings from accounting and financial regulators issued to investors well before the fraud was discovered. Each time the fraud was confirmed and revealed to the public the stock price dropped drastically.

You might want to pick up a copy of Financial Shenanigans. The chapter on AOL's revenue reporting is assigned in the Level 2 Chartered Financial Analyst curriculum. Time Warner is feeling the brunt of the latest AOL revenue fraud now.

So yeah, the IPO investors may all be missing something. And the people that noticed either a) got early access to the IPO with a preferential price and sold to the next sucker with a hefty same day return b) underwrote the IPO for a fee with no investment risk OR c) never bought the stock of Groupon. Your kind of thinking is what the investment bankers and institutional investors depend on to help them get their $10 Million+ bonuses.

But... they've already walked off with... 930 million... in cash.

http://allthingsd.com/20110602/where-did-groupons-billion-dollars-go/

This is why I hate the idea of investing. Hand somebody a pile of cash, and watch them use it for their own gain. Just a bunch of foxes in charge of the chicken coop.

1% of 6 billion would be... 60 million. Which, as you say, is enough to be set for life.

But... they've already walked off with... 930 million... in cash.

http://allthingsd.com/20110602/where-did-groupons-billion-dollars-go/

Check this other article out...

"In January, Groupon raised $950 million. By the end of March, it had $209 million in cash. What happened to all that money?"

http://allthingsd.com/20110602/where-did-groupons-billion-dollars-go/

I don't think Amazon is going to have apps for any more of their services on iOS, given that Apple has a June 30 deadline in place before they start enforcing their new rules regarding in-app purchases to existing apps. Kindle app would fall prey to that, and so would any hypothetical Amazon VOD app.

Google, who is responsible for Android, was also called to those hearings.

I did not say Google are not evil, I said Apple are evil.

I see. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right? So, how does that address the valid point I made?

Yeah, EULAs always sound terrible.

But it's in there - therefore Apple CAN legally use it if they want to.

I heard your speculation the first time; no need to repeat it. However, I still challenge you to find a single instance of Apple exercising that right. Like all large companies, Apple has a legal department. A LOT of the time, companies let things go into a contract or EULA just to shut up their OWN legal team, with no actual intention of ever enforcing the language. And yes, that's what I am saying is what happened, here. And besides, the EFF case pretty much nullifies that language, anyway, doesn't it? So now what are you saying that "Apple could do"?

Again, the potential of doing it; but obviously Apple is just putting that in as a guard against an unforseeable "worst-case-scenario" threat.

Again, it's in there. Therefore they can use it if they choose to do so.

No they can't; per the EFF case. And I pointed that out, both in my original reply to your response to my original comment, and in this further reply, too.

Too bad, just like before, you aren't letting long-settled facts mitigate your rant. You do realize, of course, that that is a sign of mental illness...

Now, let's compare that with Sony, where it took the DoJ rattling its sabre for them to stop putting rootkits on their audio CDs.

DRM disappeared on CDs completely - because the record companies had to bow to company pressures.

WTF are you SMOKING, and can I have some, please?!?

The record companies had to bow to... WHAT?!? What "company" are you talking about?!? Or are you talking about "The Company" (as in the CIA), LOL?!?

The DoJ (actually, it was the DHS) made it CRYSTAL CLEAR to Sony that the user's computers WERE NOT THEIRS to install rootkits (or anything else) on. It wasn't "industry pressures", it was the threat of CRIMINAL PROSECUTION and GOVERNMENT REGULATION that moved them. That, and pressure from retailiers, who were getting sick and tired of handling more and more RETURNS for media that SIMPLY WOULD NOT PLAY in many devices.

But, my original comments still stand: Steve Jobs called for an end to DRM. And NOBODY forced him to do THAT!

Media companies do not want anyone to own anything because they want a regular payment, rental model. Apple facilitated that by allowing DRMed music to be sold through iTunes - yes, it made the record companies sign on but Apple made a huge amount of money from it - that's basically saying they were "in league with the devil".

Once again, iTunes is NOT, repeat NOT, a major PROFIT stream for Apple. This asinine meme simply HAS to die, along with your other ridiculous claim: ZOMG! the OS X Kernel is DRM'ed...

But again, you have demonstrated that even when the facts are presented in rebuttal, you simply argue on and on and on.

They changed the DRM model because Sony's stupid rootkit fiasco brought it to the public attention, it became very unpopular and Apple had to backtrack. Period.

Oh, one final point. Do you not find it more than coincidence that Apple removed DRM from music downloads about the same time Amazon started offering DRM-free music. Yet Amazon are much smaller than Apple, wield less corporate power as a consequence, yet have never been *forced* to offer DRMed music. Explain that one.

I agree that that gave A

A recent story posted to AllThingsD includes a nifty Google trend line for the words "app" "application" and "app store." I only wish they had included program or software.

The term many here are trying to claim is obvious and generic didn't exist until Apple trademarked and implemented it's App Store in 2008. Even the term "app" had little to no usage until then.

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20110512/microsoft-apple-word-war-spreads-to-europe/

If the term is obvious it would have been used before. Plenty of vendors sold applications and programs through stores. Cellphone providers had their named stores to buy overpriced crap for you phone. Palm had a store available on its Palm Pilots.

But they never sold "apps." They sold games, ringtones, images, and applications. Apple sells apps. It's the difference between drinking a cola and drinking Coca-cola.

This entire thing just feels like sour grapes to me. Apple trademarked a term they themselves created and popularized, and now their competitors are upset they can't get away with violating Apple's trademark. Amazon should just call it the Amazon Application Store (a generic term) and be done with it.

http://www.cultofmac.com/amazons-kindle-app-has-unti-june-30th-to-support-new-in-app-purchase-rules/82176
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20110215/june-30-deadline-for-apple-subscriptions/

I use the kindle for iOS. Not the apple ebook reader. That's a free app with loads of free classics. Just reread 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea; cost $0.

Kindle app can be removed at any time according to the new rules. It's just that they're rules set by Apple, and, as such, their enforcement is subject to their whim. If they believe that Kindle has so many paying customers that ditching them from iOS would significantly hurt their image (if not profits), then Amazon gets preferential treatment - for now, at least. This guy did not. Neither did Sony with their reader app, for example.

Then can't they just draw an interface that lets them browse through book titles and post debits to their private account? If you eliminate Apple from handling the money, then will they assassinate the app?

Essentially, yes. According to Apple, they are "now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase". Not doing so is grounds for rejection of any App Store submissions (or removal of any existing apps).

Apple Developer guidelines section 11.2:

Apps utilizing a system other than the In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase content, functionality, or services in an app will be rejected.

This is why Amazon didn't let you buy books in the Kindle app, but only through Mobile Safari. It was a way around the 30% rule on IAP.

The change that people are screaming about now addresses that loophole: "We are now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase." - See All Things Digital for more.

And I'm going to trust them with important stuff? Not likely.

In certain circles, MobileMe is known as Mobile MeaCulpa. Maybe they're going to use the iCloud domain to 'start anew'.

Again.

It's news because it took so damn long. Apple has been having a lot of problems getting the white version out there. Apparently there were some problems with the sensors due to the white shell letting through more light or something. In any case it's rare for Apple to have an actual production problem (one that's not made up out of whole cloth by "analysts") for this long . Hence, news.

Apple is fifth in market share (around 10%) behind 4 other companies in terms of units sold. Their market share has doubled in the last five years but it's relatively easy to grow from 5% compared with HP's nearly 30% or Dell's 20+%. They've grown but they've only taken a fraction of the market share and almost all at the high end of the consumer market. Apple does not seriously compete in corporate PC sales nor do they compete at the lowest end of the consumer market.

The premise was that Apple couldn't continue being highly profitability while competing with "commodity hardware", they are doing exactly that with PC's.

In fact, the average selling price (consumer price + subsidy) of the iPhone has increased over the years.

Demonstrably incorrect. There are tablets out there for equal or less money from (potentially) serious competitors like Research In Motion and Motorola. Somewhat misleading though since tablets are essentially a new market so there has been little time for competitors to bring competing products to market, regardless of price.

The Xoom is the same price with a lesser GPU and the Playbook is the same price with a smaller screen.

Flash memory is not generally purchased in large quantities on a spot market. You can't just run to Toshiba and say I'd like 3 million flash memory chips delivered tomorrow. They have to purchase in advance and only then do the manufacturers produce the products. Buying market moving percentages of anything does not always result in lower prices if other people want that commodity too. If you buy 75% of the world's supply of anything, by definition you paid more than others were willing meaning you moved the price up, not down. There are numerous suppliers of flash memory and they adjust supply as demand shifts. Apple is a big player in this market but hardly the only one.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/83670-apple-on-huge-order-breaks-nand-flash-supply

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20080703/apple-takes-top-honors-in-competitive-nand-eating-contest/

The vast majority of the profit Apple makes is from selling hardware. Yes they make some money on the side from software and music sales and the rest it's a fraction of their overall revenue. Any profit Apple makes from software sales is simply gravy. Itunes exists to keep people buying iPods and iPads and iPhones. It is widely known that Apple does not make huge amounts of money from music sales. They do pretty well with App Store sales but those still are a fraction of their hardware sales. Don't take my word for it, look at Apple's financial statements.

I said profit from selling there own software for iPads.

Apple sells Numbers, Pages, GarageBand, and iMovie for the iPad. 30% of the profit would be recognized from iTunes and the other 70% would be recognized under software sells. If the average iPad buyer spends $50 extra between buying Apple software and accessories (headphones, smart covers, etc.) that's almost pure marginal profit.

Furthermore since Google is bankrolling the software development for them (Apple has to eat those software development costs themselves) the Android OEMs have a theoretically lower price floor than Apple. Conceivably they could sell the Android device for less than Apple's cost and still be profitable.

Unless you're HTC paying Microsoft a "license" for each Android phone sold. iOS development costs are spread over roughly 50 million iOS devices and the core OS is also used for roughly 12 million Macs. But either way, that has nothing to do with marginal profit.

Conceivably they could sell the Android device for less than Apple's cost and still be profitable.

That doesn't seem to be working out to well for Motorola....

Apple is now the largest cellphone manufacturer on Earth by revenue.

You have to admit that at a glance it would be easy to confuse the two. Other than the Samsung logo, they look identical.

From TFA:
http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/files/2011/04/apple-samsung-examples.png

I can see why Apple would be a little pissed. I don't' think this is specifically about the guts of the OS, but more about the basic appearance of the phone and home screen. We already know there were quite a few iPhone clones, essentially cashing in on iPhone lookalike qualities. This one is pretty obviously aimed at that same audience.

I was facepalming over this until I saw some side by sides linked from Daring Fireball.

Sauce 1

Sauce 2.

I didn't give a shit until I saw the dock ripoff on the Samsung devices. that's just fuggin' blatant.

Problem fixed.

Number of replies to this story: 88 (as of 10:45 PM ET, March 12)

4.5 Million Tablets Were Sold in Q3 2010; 4.2 Million Were iPads

You do the math.

73% in Q4, 83% for the year.. That's based on "shipped", not sold to consumers. Samsung did a lot of channel stuffing and won't release numbers on how many were actually sold. Additionally, the galaxy tab had a 16% return rate (vs 2% for the iPad).

http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110305/samsungs-10-inch-tablet-to-ship-as-announced-despite-apples-ipad-2-announcement/?mod=ATD_rss

“We will continue to make every effort to provide the most powerful, well-designed and productive mobile device to customers,” Executive Vice President Lee Don-Joo is quoted by Yonhap as saying.

A Samsung spokesman told the outlet the release plan for the Android-based Galaxy Tab 10.1 has not been affected, but declined to say when the device will ship.

Samsung's problem is all they have to offer is an open orfice OS and software which is like inviting everyone to have at you.
A quarter million already rue the day they bent over by grabing Android.
Now they have an infection they may never fully recover from.

To put it another way, for a lot of Nokia engineers it's not like, "Wow, Microsoft is giving our company a billion dollars. I will get to do a lot of cool things." But more like, "Wow, a billion dollars of Nokia R&D is going to be done by Microsoft instead for free -- my job is doomed."

Those Nokia engineers sure seem be getting a lot done. Nokia seems to spend more than their competitor's combined on R&D with nothing to show except delays.

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20110203/not-seeing-much-return-on-that-massive-rd-spend-are-you-nokia/

Part of the problem here is Apple has already bought the parts before they were even made. To the point that second-tier manufacturers are having trouble finding components to even be competitors to start with.

Samsung can give an in-house team preferential pricing, but that doesn't help them if they've already contracted most of their production yield to someone else.

http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110305/samsungs-10-inch-tablet-to-ship-as-announced-despite-apples-ipad-2-announcement/?mod=ATD_rss

“We will continue to make every effort to provide the most powerful, well-designed and productive mobile device to customers,” Executive Vice President Lee Don-Joo is quoted by Yonhap as saying.

A Samsung spokesman told the outlet the release plan for the Android-based Galaxy Tab 10.1 has not been affected, but declined to say when the device will ship.

The problem is that their guidelines are vague and broad.

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100909/apple-bye-bye-fart-apps/

As part of their guidelines, they may reject if they feel that the market is saturated with your type of app, or if your app doesn't provide enough entertainment or utility.

And directly addressing the quality aspect: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/30338/NewlyRevealed_App_Store_Guidelines_Discourage_Amateur_Hour.php

With such a wide array of content available on the App Store, Apple is cautious of letting the quality apps become drowned out by poorly-made products. "If your App looks like it was cobbled together in a few days, or you're trying to get your first practice App into the store to impress your friends, please brace yourself for rejection. We have lots of serious developers who don't want their quality Apps to be surrounded by amateur hour."

As for the potential tablets in particular, Duarte notes that those who initially brushed aside Apple's iPad when it debuted a year ago underestimated the impact of what Apple did in bringing the multi-touch screen to a larger-size device. "I think those skeptics were short-sighted," Duarte said. "That's the genius of what Apple achieved with that iPad."

Taken from this article, which came out after my post, else I would have cited it originally.

Two articles this and one refered to by the first state "facts" that are in opposition.

The first states that the accused ran their tool June 5 to June 9th, and released on July 10th.
The second states that AT&T fixed the hole on June 8 and told affected users about the breach on June 9th.

I see reports that this information was on Gawker on the 9th, not the 10th.

I see reports from June 14 that AT&T sent messages claiming to have learned of the fault June 7th. This seems likely to have been because Auernheimer and Co. tipped them off through a third party, and waited for AT&T to close the hole. This also explains the claim "we never heard from (these people)", as well as the hole being closed before the news went public.

If they can help to establish WebM as the de facto standard for Internet video, they don't have to be part of the H.264 patent pool.

Except MPEG-LA is already working on assembling a WebM/VP8 patent pool

Because WebM is apparently not free of patent encumberance, but they got to dig a bit to figure out which patents they are going to say are essential for implementation of VP8.

Tech Crunch and All Things D. Sounds like the Yahoo folks aren't too happy about the word leaking out - "whoever it is, gone!

With Yahoo shutting down Del.icio.us, where will we bookmark things such as these delicious Christmas Lights ... HO-HO-HO! ;-)

P.P.S The point of the iPhone isn't iTunes. Apple barely makes any money from the iTunes stores. They are not an iTunes company; they are a hardware company.

You should see him speak at D8 It's not often but he does acknoledge here and there that they have to work harder (in things like wireless syncing.)

I personally don't care, as I will never buy an iPad. If I want a tablet running Chrome OS, I'll buy one that's designed for it, not one that the manufacturer will engage in a running hostile battle with users over. I was responding to what I presume was an Apple fanboy's loving statement that Apple will happily allow Chrome OS on the iPad. Apple does not consider the iPad a computer.

Don't take my word for it, take Apple's:

A magical and revolutionary product - note that the word computer is never used to describe the iPad.
The Mac is designed to provide the best computer experience you can have.

See the difference?

Or from their meta description at apple.com: meta name="Description" content="Apple designs and creates iPod and iTunes, Mac laptop and desktop computers, the OS X operating system, and the revolutionary iPhone and iPad."

See how they have the iPhone and iPad away from the computer section and emphasize that they're different than anything else?

When Steve Jobs introduced it, he referred to it as a "third kind of device". It is not a general purpose computer, it is a device or an appliance - whatever new term you want to give it - that includes the fact that you WILL use it in the way to Apple says you will. My microwave and digital cameras could technically be called computers but that's not the way they're used. The iPad is like that - locked-down and specialized. My previous generation "dumb" phone had a faster CPU and more RAM than my college computer, but it wasn't usable in the same way.

Go read some of the billion articles that have been written about the shift that the iPad has caused. They're selling like crazy because people don't want a computer, they want something pretty to consume media on, and lock-down is part of how Apple provides that experience.

I'm quite familiar with Apple and their shift from a computer company to a media consumption/delivery company. Maybe you should have some evidence before you label something bullshit? Perhaps a quote from Steve Jobs referring to the iPad as a computer?

Because, believe it or not, Google and Apple are "close" to one another. As close as two companies can be while still sorta competing. The two companies share alot of the same board members to my understanding. And Brin, Page, and Jobs are not enemies.

Have you lived in a cave for the past year?

There were two shared directors as of May 2009 when the DOJ mentioned they would investigate. Then Eric Schmidt quit Apple's board and Arthur Levinson quit Google's board...

Then Jobs proclaimed that Google was trying to kill the iPhone... sure, this could all be fluff, and the two companies are really being controlled by "them" or Dr. Evil, but if so, they have quite a few people fooled... especially since Apple is now increasing the fronts on which they compete with Google, and vice versa.

Clearly, this is all orchestrated.

This story reminded me of Steve Jobs' analysis of HDCP:

Q: How is HDCP helping the antipiracy effort?

A: We didn’t invent the stuff. The problem is that Hollywood doesn’t want what happened to the music industry to happen to them. You can’t blame them. But content protection isn’t their business and they’re grasping at straws here. But we’ve got to deal with their restrictions.I feel your pain.

Should we be expected to know all the different laws of all countries? It isn't possible to know all the laws in the US.

He should have been given the opportunity to put the stars in his checked luggage.

That is, if it had ever happened, which it didn't.

“Steve did visit Japan this summer for a vacation in Kyoto, but the incidents described at the airport are pure fiction. Steve had a great time and hopes to visit Japan again soon.”

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100914/qotd-the-ninja-throwing-stars-they%E2%80%99re-for-my-friend-larry-ellison/

If you dig a little further, you will learn that the iPad came first in Apple's R&D pipeline. They had to wait for some reason, and so they made the iPhone in the interim. If you've used the iOS SDK, it becomes pretty clear that it is not something that Apple just shoved out the door in 12 or 18 months or whatever it was. It's obvious that it had already had years of effort put into it. Perhaps the SDK was indeed intended only for iPad, and they rushed it out for iPhone due to popular demand, or perhaps it was a parallel effort. But it's not something Apple just cobbled together and shoved out the door and later updated to work with iPad. iOS was built for a tablet device from the beginning, IMO.

I am not sure what you mean, but yes, Jobs states the idea started from a "tablet" but quickly switched to phone after seeing the initial mockup. That was also during the time of iPad announcement/launch. Nothing like extra marketing for the new device - "hey I've got a secret for you, come closer near the mike."

The wildcard here is device and OS compatibility, which Apple obviously had thought through pretty well. While Android seems to just march forward ignoring it, creating a challenge for app developers. I don't have an Android device, but it is my understanding that it needs to be a phone to use their app marketplace, e.g. I'm not an Android dev, either, but from the sidelines, it looks like they just keep making things tougher for devs as time goes on. Not as bad as Rim or others, but not nearly as nice as iOS. My money is on the fact that the next revision of iPad will work with 99.999% of the apps out there. I'm not sure you could say the same for an Android tablet. Correct me if I'm wrong...

Google's statement of needing a "phone" to use App Market is an artificial/business limitation, not a technical one. This is also NOT a limitation of Android OS.

As far as your iPad claims, why are there 20K apps for iPad, and 250K apps for iPad/iPod touch? Your guesses are not facts.

iOS on the other hand, was inteded for a tablet style device.

No, it was iPhone OS before it was iOS.

If you dig a little further, you will learn that the iPad came first in Apple's R&D pipeline. They had to wait for some reason, and so they made the iPhone in the interim. If you've used the iOS SDK, it becomes pretty clear that it is not something that Apple just shoved out the door in 12 or 18 months or whatever it was. It's obvious that it had already had years of effort put into it. Perhaps the SDK was indeed intended only for iPad, and they rushed it out for iPhone due to popular demand, or perhaps it was a parallel effort. But it's not something Apple just cobbled together and shoved out the door and later updated to work with iPad. iOS was built for a tablet device from the beginning, IMO.

Also, with the advanced operating systems today, such as iOS and Android, it doesn't matter what their original release device or the intended device was. They are both equally flexible enough to be adjusted to and support multiple different resolutions, architectures, and other hardware.

The wildcard here is device and OS compatibility, which Apple obviously had thought through pretty well. While Android seems to just march forward ignoring it, creating a challenge for app developers. I don't have an Android device, but it is my understanding that it needs to be a phone to use their app marketplace, e.g. I'm not an Android dev, either, but from the sidelines, it looks like they just keep making things tougher for devs as time goes on. Not as bad as Rim or others, but not nearly as nice as iOS. My money is on the fact that the next revision of iPad will work with 99.999% of the apps out there. I'm not sure you could say the same for an Android tablet. Correct me if I'm wrong...

For those of you who are new to the tubes, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Nomad, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PressPlay, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_pc
Yes, Apple's products did improve upon all these ideas, but they weren't earth shattering. They just used Apple's "size and distribution channels to scale up the innovations" and bring it to the masses.

1. Creative Nomad (before the iPod) -- oversized, horrible interface, and a slow computer interface
2. Smartphone -- before the iPhone, which phone had a standards compliant browser and usable media software. Are you really seriously going to say that the standard Palm, BlackBerry, or WinMo device was anyhere near as usable as the iPhone in 2007?
3. PressPlay -- subscription music, before iTunes, where could you *buy* mainstream music by the song and have unlimited rights to burn them to a CD?

--Bill Gates
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100211/bill-gates-on-itunes/

"Steve Jobs ability to focus in on a few things that count, get people who get user interface right and market things as revolutionary are amazing things. This time somehow he has applied his talents in getting a better Licensing deal than anyone else has gotten for music."